Richard Cardinal Cushing, Archbishop of Boston, issued a pastoral letter bearing the name The Servant Church on December 1966, in which he reaffirmed and extended some of the ecclesiological insights of Vatican II. Building on the theme of Jesus as the Suffering Servant, Cardinal Cushing argued that, just as Jesus fulfilled His role by being “the man for others,” so the Church is called upon to be “the community for others.”… “The gospel calls upon us to heal and to reconcile, to serve and to bear witness—here-and-now, in this world.” The Church started as a band of 12 around the Master. It spent centuries in catacombs being persecuted by the Roman State. It was in the Council of Nice in 325 that the bishops could gather in freedom, protected by the soldiers of Constantine. As the Second Vatican council started, Western journalists wrote that the Catholic Church has grown to the level of a multinational company like the General Motors. The Church is perhaps the richest Company or corporation, but it shall never forget its mission to be the humble servant for the world – the sign and sacrament of Christ in the world. The Church has two dimensions; it is an institution, but one which continues the mission of Christ on earth. The Church is existing as the body of Christ. There is every possibility that the church forgets its mission and gets engaged in defending itself as an institution. Its institutional structure is important, but it has to be in the service of Christ’s mission. In history there were many quarrels and dissensions that caused fissures in the Church. The true Church has clearly enunciated the differences existing between the separated Churches and mother Church. Unity could be perceived as the return of the other Christians to the one true fold through the acceptance by them of the full doctrinal and institutional heritage preserved in Roman Catholicism. This was not what the Vatican II said. It was in effect a substantialist solution. Breaking sharply from the earlier approach, Vatican II shied away from asserting that Christian unity should take the form of a return to the past or a surrender by the other Christians to Roman Catholic claims. Rather, it envisaged Church unity as progress on the part of all the Churches, including Roman Catholicism, toward a future to which God is leading His people. This future-oriented attempts for union will remain mere verbalism unless and until the underlying ecclesiology is understood and accepted. The Church, according to this view, does not exist as a finished product. “As the centuries succeed one another, the Church constantly moves forward toward the fullness of divine truth until the words of God reach their complete fulfilment in her” (Dei verbum, no 8). Hence, there is a wide scope for reform in the way in which papacy and episcopate are conceived and implemented. The line between reformable and irreformable institutions, like that between reformable and irreformable doctrines, is itself subject to constant re-evaluation. Avery Dallas wrote, “Perhaps certain other structures, today understood as divinely ordained, may eventually be regarded as ecclesiastical institutions, and consequently as mutable. Or the very idea of divine institution may be reinterpreted to include an element of reversibility. Have we not too casually assumed that whatever God institutes He institutes for all time?” The unity and Catholicity of the Church are always and in every case still in becoming; they will always remain a task. The solution cannot lie either in mutual absorption or in simple integration of individual ecclesiastical communities, but only in the constant conversion of all—i.e., in the readiness to let the event of unity, already anticipated in grace and sign, occur ever and again in obedience to the one gospel as the final norm in and over the Church. This applies not only regarding the separated ones but also with the dissenting ones as well. Irreformable stiffness anywhere and in anybody divides and separates. George Gadamer argued that all people have a historically-effected consciousness; thus, all people are living in a historical stream of tradition that helps to define them. All the reformers received the Gospels and the Christian Intellectual tradition of centuries, along with traditions of worship, piety, and a sense of how those complexes fit together with the rest of society. By examining what they did with their mental and emotional inheritance, the Church must go much further in our understanding of them and in the efforts at making progress on understanding the human condition. Even Gregory Baum, who fled Germany when he was 16 years old, never gave up his German identity. He writes, “I refused to allow Hitler to define my identity. I remained a German and treasured the German language.”